tv Meet the Press NBC July 19, 2010 2:05am-3:05am EDT
capture 30 seats and the majority. back in 1994, the new gingrich led gop had a house majority, gaining 52 seats. just two years ago, president obama swept into washington on a change message, reviving hopes of a democratic political realignment. two years later, why is the house up for grabs again? >> it's a combination of the overexposure in terms of democratic siege with a horrible economy and people just sort of very unhappy with washington, and they're lashing out. and if republicans were in power under these circumstances, they would be the victims of this, too. you know, this is a very, very ugly political environment. >> republicans will campaign this fall, saying we are not the free-spending democrats. democrats will urge voters to consider the election a choice, not a referendum on president obama. >> this is going to be a choice between the policies that got us
into this mess and my policies that are getting us out of this mess. >> and that is where we will start. i'm joined here in the very first joint interview by the house and senate campaigns, democratic howard menendez and john cornan for the house, pete sessions. welcome. mr. sessions, respond to the house. it's going to be a choice this fall between the policies that got us into this mess and my policies which are getting us out of this mess. do you think that's how the public is going to see it? >> i think the public sees it as a big government with more spending. the president and the house are too tense through a biggendaage. the bottom line is people see how government is doing so well and jobs are not doing so well. i think there is a change in the
air. >> but there is an argument by democrats, you have to consider the choice here. there is the president's policies or there is a reminder of the bush republican era. is that a scare tactic? >> of course, it is, because speaker pelosi has been in charge for four years and denied the president to continue to do what was successful in this country, and that is making the free enterprise system not only more powerful but competitive with the world. today it's about em powering government, and that is a mistake. >> senator menendez, you heard howard cook talk about this atmosphere right now. why is that the case? >> there are a lot of people hurting in this country and we realize that. that is why we are working to try to change the economy we inherited. this will be a choice election. because i know my republican colleagues would like to have everybody forget their candidates are on the ballot, but their candidates will be on the ballot. it's not just talking about president bush, it's the policies that are in essence
bush's policies. those led us to a 72% increase in the debt, from $5 trillion to $8 tril dwron. it led to a surplus left by george bush and he had a $100 trillion deficit when he left office. so our republican colleagues who had their hands on the wheel and drove the car off the cliff into the grand canyon in the huge cra crater don't want to stay respon -- take responsibility. >> if this is the reality, apparently the public doesn't want to buy into it. according to the poll, if elections were held today, who would you vote for? you see the results there, the republicans have an edge, 47% to 46%, and a certain edge going to republicans 47 to 40. how serious is this climate here against the democrats? >> well, david, if you look at that "washington post" abc poll,
the interesting fact that came out of it and the one that was right on the front page was the fact that the american people have a lot less confidence in republicans in congress than they do in democrats in congress, and that's not surprising. it's pretty fresh in their memory exactly what those republican policies did to the economy. after all, during the whole eight years of the bush administration, we actually lost over 600,000 private sector jobs. we're now seeing positive job growth. and the good news, i think, for the american people is our republican colleagues are reminding people every day that they would adopt the same policies they had before. john beanor, the republican leader, just this week said he was going to move to appeal the wall street reform bill. lobbyists have worked really hard for that wall street reform bill. and he said, just wait. if i have the opportunity, i'm going to take care of it for you. it's that kind of thing that
will make it clear to the american people who kind of choice they have. >> senator? >> i wonder when they're going to take responsibility for the policies they forced down the throats of the american people, including the appeal bill that will bring costs down. the president's ratings about 36% down from independent voters. and we're seeing the independent voters fleeing the democrats coming to the republicans because they believe checks and balances are absolutely essential in 2010 because they want to restrain this unprecedented spending binge, the debt, and i think they see the republicans as the best way to provide those checks and balances. >> some of the fallout of the news that was made right here last sunday, robert gibbs stating what a lot of people in politics thought was obvious, and that is that democrats are in trouble in the house. they could indeed lose majority
status in the house, but the reaction among democrats to a member of the administration, a top white house adviser actually saying that as reported in the hill newspaper on thursday said the following, if the administration is trying to tell us stay away from us with an arm's length, they did a good job. we don't need a wake-up call. the white house needs a wake-up call on the policies of these issues. particularly in these toss-up districts, do you think it sent the wrong message? >> this is a distinctions between a mathematical possibility and a probability. we have said all along, this is going to be a very tough political election, for all the reasons people have said. but we also said at the end of the day, we're confident we're going to retain a majority of the house. the democrats are on the same page now. they had a great meeting with the president, it was positive, we talked about the agenda for the remainder of the year, and we emphasized the fact that voters are going to have this
choice we're talking about i hear this morning. because the republicans want to get away, essentially, with carping and whining about everything here without telling the american people what they will do. we're now beginning to hear a little about what they would do -- >> go back to the democrats. there was a sense with the house democrats i spoke to over a period of time frustration with the white house. they took tough votes on health care, on climate change, on the stimulus, and they felt like this white house is not made up of very strong allies. this was really the icing on the cake, wasn't it? >> well, we know the white house is a strong ally for this reason. the fact of the matter is the president and the white house know they need a strong majority in the house and in the senate in order to complete their agenda, to deep working on that agenda. they also know that the day after the elections, it will be interpreted as a referendum on the president's policies in the press, whether they like it or not. so we are on the same page now. david, there is some frustration. the frustration is there are
lots of important bills to push for jobs that are sitting over in the senate, but it's not the fault of the democratic leadership in the senate. frankly, john cornyn and his allies have been trying to block a whole lot of very important jobs measures. we, in fact, sent a piece of legislation over very recently that would remove these perverse tax incentives to ship js overseas, that give american corporations a bonus if they ship american jobs overseas. they voted against that. it's now in the senate. i hope they will join with the democrats and pass that kind of measure. so the frustration is while we've made important progress, we still want to keep working and moving guard forward on the economy and there is a lot bottle d up in the senate. >> if you remember newt gingrich
sweeping into majority status winning 52 seats. at the time they wrote this in the "new york times" which caught my attention. republicans base much of their push for major gains on the nation that the democrats, who in 1992 won control of the white house while retaining the senate and the house, had since disappointed the voters. that made it possible for gingrich to send out one clear message to the nation which couldn't be done with the difference in the parties. here republicans made a choice. unity to opposition to everything the president has put forward. >> i think every election is different, david, and this election will be different from 1994. no matter what this count is, it will be a different election. but i want to say to my friend chris, the problem is the democrats have been able to pass almost everything on the president's agenda and they've been doing it with a my way or the highway approach without reaching out and seeking compromise and republican
support. and as a result, the business round table, one of the big allies of this white house, has come out and given a list of job-killing policies that have been passed which make job creators sit on the sidelines. if there's one area where this administration has failed miserably, it's creating an environment where job creators will create those jobs and fill the economy. because people without a job can't pay their mortgage and they lose their home. we see everything on the democratic agenda except for the number one thing on the mind of most americans, and that is jobs, how can i keep my home, how can we strengthen the government without sustaining a debt. >> if you look at where the president stands, these are policy issues the senate is bringing up. the president is at 48% disapproval. the "washington post" poll this week that we referenced showed
six out of ten americans lacked faith in the president, and here's how the post reported it. public confidence in obama has reached a new low. four months before mid-term elections it will define the second half of his term. they lack faith in their president to make decisions for their country. is november a referendum for obama? >> november is a choice election, and the reality is i listen to john talk about the agenda in the senate. the republicans have been the job killers in the senate. in essence, they have used the filibuster in an unprecedented way in the nation's history to stop progress on everything we have tried to do. so as we are trying to help the private sector grow jobs by giving them tax incentives, net operating laws, bonus appreciation, incentives to hire
people, they have said no, no, no, no. the problem is, in this choice election, it will be far less than the president. it will be about whether or not we go back to the bush economic policies, the policies that john kyle, the number two republican in the senate said -- >> you just heard your colleague from the house say, look, it's going to be perceived as a referendum on obama. >> no, i think what chris said, at the end of the day, the results, whatever they are, positive or negative, may be viewed that way. but when john kyle says you don't have to pay for $680 billion of tax cuts whatsoever, just add it onto the debt, but you can't even take care of $30 billion to have people who are unemployed in this country get through the emergency of the moment? it's a big difference. when we look at jobs, the reality is we lost 2.9 million jobs in the first six months of the president's time that he inherited from bush. we created 680,000 jobs in the first part of this year.
>> howard feinman in his column wrote this. obama won over male independent voters in 2008. they may be all that stands between democrats and catastrophe this fall. the democrats' support among this group has fallen to as low as 35 percent in some polls and the reasons are clear. they do not believe that obama's actions are good, the bp oil spill has hurt obama's ability to fend off charges that he's ineffective as a leader. they hope to win back votes to fight back republicans, individually and as a group. the plan is not to blame george w. bush. and we're hearing this this
morning. >> bob says we have a long way to go in the economy. people are hurting, that much is clear. but we all know what the american people know, which is the day george bush left office, we were losing 700,000 jobs a month, and during the full eight years of the bush administration, we lost private sector jobs. we are beginning to climb out. what we're saying is, yes, let's focus on the policies, because why in the world would we want to go back to the same economic agenda that created that mess, that lost jobs for eight years? i think the challenge that our colleagues have here, pete and john, is to say to the american people, how do you expect to do the same thing and get a different result? >> is that what republicans stand for today, the party of george bush, the economic policy of george bush. >> it's not truthful. people had jobs when republicans were not only in charge but when george bush was there. we doubled the size of the economy over 12 years. we did things that strengthened
the economy citizen. there will be candidates who will be back on the ballot back home facing the democrats who have voted in the 90% realm with nancy pelosi to raise taxes and a bigger government and a health care plan which we cannot sustain and will quite likely bankrupt not only states but business also. these candidates from top to bottom, whether we talk about rick berg and christy nome are saying we must live within our own means. >> what are your candidates going to say about president obama? what has he done to government? >> first of all, they're going to run against the person who is on the ballot with them, and that person has voted for more spending and big taxes and more of an agenda. that's about empowering washington, d.c., not back home. they are going to say we should read the bills before we vote on them. we should make sure we live
within our means and, perhaps most of all, get behind an agenda where the american people are which began for us one year ago in august when republicans would attend town hall meetings and hear about health care. >> david, you heard the very beginning of the answer to your question, a defense of the george bush economy and the george bush years. and i don't think the american people see it that way, because they know we had a meltdown in the financial sector. they know we lost jobs, and so when they hear the republican leader john beahnor say he wants to appeal the wall street reform bill, which is an effort to make sure the american people and the economy are not again held hostage by bad debts on wall street, they recognize they do, in fact, want to go back to those policies. they have joe barton, the head of the energy committee, who would be the head of the energy committee, a ppologizing to bp. it's a big oil agenda. they've got the folks who opposed the legislation to try
and remove the tax loopholes that help export u.s. jobs overseas. we want to shut those loopholes. they fear all this and they see what they're going to get if you had, you know, republicans in charge is that economic agenda, and they can't answer that basic question. what are you going to get that's different? >> well, senator, what does distinguish the republican party of today from the republican party under president bush's rule with regard to spending, which is where it got out of control under republican rule, that now conservatives are so excited about? >> let's look at a few facts. thank you for the opportunity because i want to respond to what chris said. you know, in the last year that president bush was in office, 2008, the deficit was 3.2% of the gross domestic product. today it's 10%. we just hit the $13 trillion cap on national debt, 2.3 trillion since obama -- >> the president of the united states was george bush when they
had a huge t.a.r.p. which was to bail out the banks. that's what run up the debt as well. you're saying the republicans -- >> you're ignoring the stimulus that failed according to the president's own standards. he said he was supposed to keep employment to 8%. a bill that will stagnate the states and government program. unemployment was roughly 6.9% when president obama was elected. now it's 9.5%. the deficit was 3.2% the last time president bush was in office, now it's 10%. the debt was $2.3 billion lower in 2008 than it is now because of runaway spending and debt. >> what is the distinction of the republican party today versus the bush record that you're defending? >> i think what people are looking for, david, are checks and balances. they've had single-party government, and it's scared the
living dalylights out of them. >> is that a strategy of saying no rather than saying yes to something? >> my constituents in texas, i have to tell you, to all the bad ideas they hear coming out of washington, these days no was a good start. then they want us to replace it with common sense policies that actually make sense. but the problem is, our friends on the democratic side, including the president, have passed one unpopular policy measure after another and told the american people, we don't care what you think, we know better than you do what's good for you, and i think the birds are coming home to roost. >> david, the check and balance is to go back to exactly the same policies that gave us a 72% increase in the national debt and nearly $9.8 trillion. if the check and balance is to take bill clinton's $232 billion surplus and make it a $1.5 trillion deficit, if the check and balance is the malaise of
the bush years where income remained stagnant and jobs were lost, if the check and balances are to be with big oil, big insurance and wall street against the average individual, then that's where the republican party is at. >> let's take a break and we'll come back and talk about particular issues where the two sides will debate. i want to ask one last question about the president's standing and to what extent it has an impact. the headline, why obama loses even by winning. thursday's passage of financial reform just a couple months after the passage of a comprehensive health care overhaul should decisively and the narrative out of washington. yet the mystery remains, having moved swiftly toward achieving the very policy objectives he promised voters as a candidate, obama is still widely perceived as a failed presidency. this is not 1994 where democrats
had a difficult time achieving anything. there has been major achievements here, and yet are democrats reeping the awards? >> the fact remains the economy is soft. and when you have a soft economy, people understandably are anxious. and the question they're going to have on their minds when they go into that voting booth and face two different candidates is who is going to best respond to the economy? i have to say, we're some minutes into this discussion yet and we still have not heard from our colleagues what they would do differently than the bush economic agenda which got us into this mess. we're now in positive job growth. let me make this point. we have the situation right now where our republican colleagues are holding hostage an extension of middle class tax cuts. they've said we're only going to support a continuation of middle class tax cuts, those for people under $250,000 if you also extend the bush tax cuts for the very wealthy. and by the way, that's $700 billion over ten years. you hear all this talk about
deficit reduction, that they don't want to pay for. they want to leave it to their children and grandchildren. we can make progress here today if those democrats agree to allow those middle class tax cuts to be extended without having to add $17 billion to the deficit. >> but the senator said raising taxes on americans by allowing the bush tax cuts to expire in january would be a real mistake in this economy. is that wrong? >> the bottom line is what would be a mistake would be to add $700 billion of debt to the next generation. when the number two republican in the senate, john kyle, says, we don't have to pay for that. we don't have to pay for it. i'm tired of listening to the lectures about spending and debt when they wracked up record debt. when you don't have to pay for tax cuts on the wealthiest people in the country, but you can't help working americans get
a job. >> is president obama an asset or liability on the campaign trail? >> he's absolutely an asset. >> he'll campaign across the country? >> absolutely. he was doing that. he was in michigan the other day in a car battery factory, he's been around the country. he's an asset and he's also very clearly drawing the distinctions here, what the choices are for voters going forward. >> we're going to take a break and come back and talk a little bit more about the republicans. should they get the majority in the house? we'll be back with our decision on 2010 and the power of we know why we're here.
there's oil out there we've got to capture. my job is to hunt it down. i'm fred lemond, and i'm in charge of bp's efforts to remove oil from these waters. bp has taken full responsibility for the cleanup and that includes keeping you informed. every morning, over 50 spotter planes and helicopters take off and search for the oil. we use satellite images, infrared and thermal photography to map and target the oil. then, the boats go to work. almost 6,000 vessels. these are thousands of local shrimp and fishing boats organized into task forces and strike teams. plus, specialized skimmers from around the world. we've skimmed over 27 million gallons of oil/wer mixture and removed millions more with other methods. we've set out more than 8 million feet of boom to protect the shoreline. i grew up on the gulf coast and i love these waters. we can't keep all the oil from coming ashore, but i'm gonna do everything i can to stop it, and we'll be here as long as it takes to clean up the gulf.
we are back continuing our decision 2010 debate with the four leaders responsible for winning congressional races for their party this fall. congressman sessions, i want to go back to you. this has been a debate so far this morning about, you know, relative merits of republican rule during the bush years and what this president has or has not accomplished so far. i think what a lot of people want to know is if republicans
do get back into power, what are they going to do? >> it's quite simple. the american people do understand the agendas that are before us. they understand what the president and speaker stand for and they understand what republicans stand for. republicans and especially our candidates who are all over this country very strong standing with the american people back home. we need to live within our own means and certainly projections that are ahead including health care and the projections for unemployment for a long time and debt for as far as we can see is staggering. we need to live within our own means. we need to make sure that we read the bills. these bills are so bad, which is why we don't have a budget that's being looked at now. the 2011 budget is staggering in terms of taxes and the discipline that is lacking from this house democratic leadership to even debate and bring the bill for the budget and
aappropriation ratis to the flo >> what painful choice are republicans prepared to make? will they campaign on repealing health care for instance? repealing financial regulation? would you like to see those two things done? >> first of all, let's go right to it. we're going to balance the budget. we should live within our own means and we should read the bills and work with the american people. >> name a painful chance republicans are prepared to say we ought to make. >> we need to make sure that as we look at all that we are spending in washington, d.c. with not only the entitlement spending but also the bigger government, we cannot afford anymore. we have to empower the free enterprise system. >> these are not specific. voters get tired of that. deal with entitlement spending and you raise the retirement age on social security and repeal health care? >> he wants to diminish employers' ability to be
competitive across this world. we need to make sure that we allow employers, which was in that 52-page report that was presented to the president of the united states by ceos in this country. we need to go back to the exact same agenda empowering the free enterprise system. >> i'm hearing specifics on painful choices to deal with the deficit, is social security on the table? what will republicans do that will give them -- like '94. there was a contract with america. what will voters say this is what republicans will say yes to? >> the president has a debt commission that reports december the 1st. we would like to see what they come back with. we have three of our most outstanding members on that commission. and my hope is they'll come back with a bipartisan solution to the debt and particularly
entitlement report as you mention. >> they need a debt commission to figure out what they want to cut? >> we need to do this on a bipartisan basis. >> what's the republican party stand for? >> well, in part, what i alluded to earlier, people are tired of runaway spending and debt. that's a positive agenda. >> do you campaign to repeal health care if you have majority status? >> i think repeal and replace it with common sense solution that will bend the cost curve. >> individual businesses, individuals, and states are going to suffer a great financial loss as a result to the huge expansion of entitlements in this health care bill. we had alternatives as you saw at the summit that lamar alexander and others articulated. >> we don't debate all issues with health care. what about repealing financial
reform? >> you asked what the positive a agendas was. republicans had a positive agenda in health care. i think bob corker was very articulate saying he hoped for a compromise that would actually make sense instead of preserving the too big to fail doctrine. >> repeal financial regulation, yes, no, maybe? >> this is a 200-page bill that not even chris dodd says he doesn't know how it will impact the economy or financial systems for some time to come. that's part of the problem as pete said. passing legislation with unintended consequences and based on a ideological approach opposed to let's solve the problem and help encourage growth of the economy as folks in the business round table said the job killing agenda this administration is the reason why people are sitting on the sidelines, job creators, investors, entrepreneurs. >> one thing that is fair. you look at polling, there are a
lot of voters out there who would like to go back and begin at scratch and begin all over rather than supporting the obama economic policies. that's a reality. >> i think actually when you look at the choice between where the president has taken the country from what he inherited versus what our colleagues espouse which is in essence the bush economics, reality is in that choice they have a preference for the president's economic policies. let me answer the questions my dear friend, john, wouldn't. they say repeal health care and replace. you have a host of issues you enjoy today that won't be enjoyed anymore. you won't see seniors closing that prescription drug gap they have. you won't be able to have pre-existing conditions be a bar to you getting insurance. you don't have a child born at birth who if they have a defect to no longer be denied
insurance. we have cost control in that bill. two weeks before the wall street reform bill was passed, you know, hedge fund managers ultimately raised $1 million for republican candidates two weeks before the bill was being voted on and they tried to stop us four times in the senate before we got the wall street reform. i think people in america believe in a free market as we as democrats do but there's a difference between a free market and -- >> you do have exploding debt in this country. nearly 10% unemployment. the president made a major policy agenda built around creating a new government entitlement. that's hurting him with a lot of voters. >> the fact is as cbo scored which is nonpartisan congressional budget office if you look at a 20-year period, you actually reduce the deficit by $1.4 trillion. if do you what they want to do and repeal, they are adding to the deficit. if i could just go make a couple
points here because pete really said what we're saying. i wrote it down. they want to go back to the same agenda. the same agenda that got us into this mess. the bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2001 and 2003, we know they didn't create any jobs because at the end of that eight-year period you had a loss of private sector jobs and that's a fact. why in the world we would want to go back to that agenda i think is a mystery to me and it's going to be a mystery to the american people going forward. what they do have some creative ideas including the guy who's their point person on the budget committee which is the road map plan. they would go back to a proposal to partially privatize social security, which is something pete has supported and we can have that debate but the american people need to know that and they also have a plan to turn medicare into a voucher program. you give the senior the voucher. by the way, the value of that voucher will decrease substantially and we'll throw you over to the insurance
industry. those are the ideas that their point person on the budget committee have and they need to know that. >> i want to ask you political operative questions as well that play a role here. some of it has to do with money and how much candidates can r e raise and affects both parties and affects get out to vote in both races. why is it in this political party that we've been talking about it's difficult for republicans to raise money when democrats raised when they were challenging republican rule in 2006? >> in 2006 republicans had more money and we lost. one thing that is very apparent is the american people are not after money. they're after progress. the progress that's being made in washington is what democrats will be judged for. the progress that they're making despite what is being said here about george bush. >> raising money doesn't matter? >> during the last few months republicans have raised more money and we will probably be
outspent maybe even 1.7 to 1. the american people understand what is happening in washington, d.c. and this is an agenda that's out of control. >> i want to talk about the tea party as well. the impact whether it is sarah palin or some prominent tea party candidates we'll put a few running in senate races, ones to watch this year in terms of tea party impact, sharon angle and marco rubio running again charlie crist who is now an independent running for the senate and we're waiting to see how the democrat will, rand paul, a republican in kentucky. there are real debates about the role of the tea party and whether there are racist elements within the party itself. the naacp had its meeting this week and talked about -- called on the tea party to stand up to those forces.
the headline naacp resolution addresses tea parties. the organization passed a resolution calling on tea party leaders to condemn racism within the at t the tea party movement. the tea party movement is not just about higher taxes and limited government. the resolution says but something that could evolve and become more dangerous for small percentage of people that think our country has been taken away from them. is this a problem? >> well, i think it is slanderous to suggest the vast movement of citizens that showed up at town hall meeting a ininga party movements say there's no basis for it. i think what the tea party movement demonstrates and enthusiasm we see from independents and republicans is that if washington isn't going to change itlf, then we're
going to change washington. i think that's what we're seeing. if folks like nevada for example, 14% unemployment since harry reid is running for re-election, after 27 years in the united states congress, if you want to continue those policies and those sorts of results, go ahead and vote for harry reid. if you want change, if you want people who are willing to live within their means and to rein in this runaway spending -- >> you talk about nevada. senator reid is pulling ahead of sharon angle. he's up 44% to 37%. this comes after a time when sharron angle made extreme statements about the bp slush fund. she talked about second amendment remedies for her political opponents and the criticism is that tea party injects candidates who are too
extreme to actually win re-election. is that a concern for you? >> well, let's look at what harry reid said. he called the former chairman of the federal reserve a hack. he declared the iraq war lost and the surge a failure before it even started in 2007. and he called the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff incompetent. harry reid is known for his gaffs. this isn't about personality. this is about policies. >> you have rand paul who got into trouble with extreme comments. and you have a movement of tea partiers who are in effect arguing they should govern when they are opposed to government. how much of a problem is that? >> i believe these are citizens who should not be demonized and marginalized. these are people who are concerned about the direction of the country. they have every right to participate in the political process and to make sthur their views are represented in
washington because they see washington running away with not only their present prosperity but also the burden it's putting on our children and grandchildren. >> you heard earlier this week if elected they should be co-oped by the republican party. >> what's clear to me when i look at the tea party it's one-third democrat, one-third republican and one-third independent but 100% are sure the agenda taking place in washington, d.c. is about extremism. it's about bankrupting this country and every state within this country. and chris talked about how the federal government will see this $1.2 trillion surplus or at least diminishment of the debt but they're passing that to other people and diminishing employment at the same time. this agenda is outrageous and the american people are --
>> congressman van hollen, what is the impact of the tea party in the fall? >> it's a mixed bag for the republicans. on one hand there's a lot of energy on the tea party side. on the other hand, it's driving a lot of their candidates farther and farther to the right. most of the districts that are in play are the swing districts. and what the tea party movement has done is take a lot of their nominees farther to the right. we saw in a special election last year in upstate new york a seat that had been held by the republicans since abraham lincoln was president that the tea party movement drove the more moderate republican candidate out of the race entirely and bill owens ran a good campaign and focused on jobs and the economy and won a seat held by republicans since the civil war. there's a real danger for them in moving farther to the right. that's the reality of what's happening. >> did the naacp go too far? >> they expressed their views based on signs and statements and other things. i'll let their judgment as the
nation's conscious on race stand for their own proposition. i will say this about the tea party. look, it's not about marginalizing people. i'm glad to see people get involved in their government. but there's a reason that my colleague here wanted sue louden versus sharron angle. he understood that the people who won those races in the tea party movement are too extreme in their positions even for their state. when you want to put radioactive waste in yucca mountain and abolish the department of education, it won't fall. when rand paul say it's unamerican to pressure bp to do the right thing in the gulf, it's not going to sell. it's not because they're part of a movement but because their positions are too extreme for the general election environment. >> senator cornyn, a prediction for fall. what kind of pickups are you
looking at if any in the senate? >> we're lead organize tied in about eight seats currently held by democrats and if the election were held today, it would be a good election. we have more than 100 days to go and it's anybody's guess. we're looking for a pretty good november 2nd. >> how many seats do you think? >> i don't know. >> senator? >> democrats in the senate will be a majority after this election despite midterm election history and headwinds. we're competitive. six weeks ago we sat here with you and we're competitive in a series of races that we weren't -- that are republican held we wouldn't have said that six weeks ago. >> do democrats hold the snous. >> i think our candidates will take us to victory and republicans requecan win in nov. >> how many seats? >> slightly over 40. >> that means majority is gone. >> these people are popping champagne bottles over there but democrats will retain the majority in the house.
it will be a tough election but the fact of the matter is when voters focus on the choice before them to continue progress remade or go back to policies that got news this mess to begin with, the choice is clear. >> we'll leave it there. thank you all very much. we'll have you back before election time. a look back in our "meet the press minute." it was 1974. the chairs of both political parties appeared right here on "meet the press" and offered at quicken loans, we're making it easier for you to get a home loan. we've got a way for you to check the status of your loan online... securely, any time, anywhere. our e signature technology makes it really easy... for you to sign your documents from home. we've helped over three-quarters of a million families... refinance or purchase their home. it's how we've done things at quicken loans for 25 years now. it's why quicken loans is one of america's largest mortgage lenders. - and that's why i love... - i love being a home loan expert. ♪
we are back with our "meet the press minute." predictions and elections go hand in hand. this morning we've heard all of the predictions for this november. here's a look back at the spin coming from both parties just three days ahead of the 1974 midterms when things were looking bleak for the republicans. the watergate scandal was looming large following. nixon's resignation in august and unemployment was at a three-year high. november 3rd, the heads of the
two major national political committees, robert straws, chairman of the democratic national committee and mary luis smith, appeared here on "meet the press" and tried to put their best foot forward. >> i think every poll shows that people in this staying are disturbed about the economy, they are disturbed about their way of life and the polls also show by 2.5 to 1 that people of this nation have more confidence in democrats ability to meet their economic needs, meet the great unmet needs of this nation and deal with their problems. the people's problems. >> do you think it will be an endorsement of the party? >> it will be a referendum on who is best able to come to grips with problems facing this nation today and i think we'll win that referendum. i think we'll gain five seats in the senate. conceivably four and conceivably
six. i think in the house we'll gain 27 to 31 or two seats. more difficult to predict. i think we'll do that well. >> ms. smith, many political observers and pollsters predict republican disaster because of watergate and inflation. >> do you think they may be wrong? >> i think we're going to do much better than people have predicted. >> will you be as brave as mr. strauss and give us your predictions on what you think you will do? >> i don't know that's bravery. i won't make an estimate. i have not played the numbers game. i think we'll do much better than people are predicting. >> not even democrat party chairman guessed correctly how much of a land slide victory it
would be for his parties. democrats picked up 48 seats increasing their majority above the announcer: in today's markets how can you get your investments heading in the right direction? at oppenheimerfunds, our fund managers' perspective on the numbers helps uncover opportunities no matter which way the markets are moving. ask your advisor about oppenheimerfunds. call your advisor for a prospectus with complete fund information. read it carefully and carefully consider fund investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses before investing. mutual funds are subject to market risk and volatility. shares may lose or gain value. oppenheimerfunds. the right way to invest.
we've got to get you out of the office more often. ♪ my turn to drive. ♪ >> that is all for today. the debate will continue. our special thanks to our [ dr. banholzer ] every once in awhile there's a moment where everything comes together. where there's magic. and you now understand what nature's been hiding. ♪ at dow we understand the difference between innovation and invention. invention is important. it's the beginning. it's the spark. but innovation is where we actually create value for dow, for society, and for the world. ♪ at dow, we're constantly searching for how to use our fundamental knowledge of chemistry to solve these difficult problems. science is definitive. there is a right answer out there.
[ male announcer ] the same 117 elements do the fundamental work of chemistry. ♪ the difference, the one element that is the catalyst for innovation, the one element that changes everything is the human element. ♪ you took my eggs ! it's an "egg management fee." what does that even mean ? egg management fee. even kids know it's wrong to take other people's stuff. that's why at ally bank we offer rates among the most competitive in the country that won't get eaten away by fees. it's just the right thing to do.
two neighbors and remote hidewaes. one fastidious. the other funky. >> around the house was garbage. but to them it was just unique. >> in a feud over property, someone stepped way over the line. >> things really, really accelerated with the hatred, the spewing of words, and the fear. >> physical threats. poisoned pets. and then -- the explosion they had feared. >> please send somebody right away. >> a line in the sand. blood on the ground. [ screams ] >> in ra gorgeousic